While on the Conference Call:To mute your phone: press: 4*To raise you hand for a question or comment: press: 5*

Use this Forum to contact Team Law;use this link for more: contact information.In conjunction with our Success Network We announced our participation in the Self Made Man Conteston our Facebook and Twitter pages.

What is the new Self Made Man platform?It’s kinda like Netflix, but better.The content and platform will help you change your life, and the world…

It launches: February 20thAnd, to celebrate,they’re giving away over $35,000 in cash and prizes!

Better yet, may I suggest honesty on this subject in general. The Washington page sounds like pure "public relations propaganda". The guy has been in jail for YEARS. He hasn't "served" anything but time in the clink. The "governor's pages" all sound like a thinly veiled attempt to convey legitimacy to a situation that just plainly is NOT happening. This whole thing seems too dependant on one man, and that man appears to be overwhelmed at the moment, seeing as he hasn't tended to his own forum in over a month.

This "governor" thing needs to be handled openly and honestly.
* How many are activley seated as governor?
* How many votes did they get elected with?
* What is their qualifications for the position?
* Why are they even running for the spot in the first place?
* What are their views on ANY subject?

Shouldn't there be something like "public disclosure" in some fashion in order to have honest legitimacy, rather than merely the appearance of legitimacy resulting from vagueries? (i.e. "So and so got a lot of votes". How many is "a lot"??) How do we honestly vote for somebody we know nothing about? A simple statement written by each individual candidate running for election would be a huge step in the right direction. A website covering the elections, or status, or goings-on with the office in each state would be wonderful. A simple introduction from the sitting governors would add TONS of legitimacy. Are these people real? Do they really exisit?

There needs to be accountablility on this issue. With the information available at this point, on this site or any other, a rational person could only conclude that there are ZERO "original jurisdiction governors" seated at this time.

NOT disclosing numbers and statistics has two effects: 1) The "believers" who just really want to believe are convinced that unknown = lots. 2) Everyone else is left with apathy and uncertainty, or outright rejection of the notion. Unfortunately, the "believers" are then left with the opportunity to be self-decieved, and follow lock-step into whatever con is put before them. If you believe something with no facts, you are a victim waiting to be fleeced. This simply cannot be handled with secrecy, obfuscation, and redirection.

Does anybody have any numbers for any "election" anywhere in the country? Surely, if there really are any "governors" (or people who personally know someone that is "governor") that visit here, they can identify themself, and state here on the record exactly how many votes they received, and how many votes were cast in total. Its probably the same number, and it's probably less than 10. But "we the people" would like to know that for sure.

Somebody please disclose some valid information... I know Team Law is not responsible for this process, but merely attempting to centralize some information. But that doesn't even appear to be happening, as Team Law doesn't appear to have any personal contact or knowledge of a lot of these candidates and current governors. Is there a single state with a website detailing their efforts and accomplishments?

Gnostique & Planetmark:
The reason Washington’s election is not posted is because we are not aware of it holding a constitutional election this year. If we were aware of such an election it would be posted on the list with the other states.

It is also true that even though Governor Brailey did serve as the original jurisdiction governor for at least six years before he was convicted and jailed for a felony, the last we heard he is in jail and we are not aware of any other person that has been properly qualified to that office since Governor Brailey served there; therefore, his last known information remains on that page.

We are not aware of any "public relations propaganda" in the “governor’s pages”.

So far as the allegation that this “whole thing” is dependant on one man we do not believe it unless that one man (or woman) is the individual self of each one of us—then we agree and that is the only way it can be.

Yes, Governor Madsen stood up as the first man to run for an original jurisdiction governor’s office since at least 1972. But, since that time over 40 people have stood up to run and accept original jurisdiction governor’s offices around the country. It is only a start of what is required to win our country back. It may have started with the efforts of one man, but it is the hope of our entire country. The limitation is most of the people in our country are not aware of what is happening all around them. They need an awakening. The awakening is happening, but slowly. We agree with you that not enough people are involved in the process of awakening their neighbors and the task is moving forward slowly. History proves one man can make a difference. This battle did start with one man and that is certainly the key; to win our country back we each need to learn the law and to do all we can to reseat our original jurisdiction government. The war of Independence was won against Great Britain because each man knew the necessity of standing for our Liberty. This battle is no different only then most of the people were aware of what was going on. To win the battle today all we have to do is help our friends and neighbors learn the truth about what is going on. With the truth disclosed the law, history and the people will all be on our side. Finally, we stand on the side of the law, the truth and most importantly the King of Kings, the best example of one person making a difference.

As to the allegation of being overwhelmed, the task before us is daunting but the size of the task does not relate to its performability. It is a simple matter of eating an elephant—the only way to do it is one bite at a time. The personal matters that took Team Law’s Admin away have been resolved. We actually expected people would be more respectful and help each other while we were away—and certainly that has happened. Perhaps that is too much to expect from some but we continue to have faith in the people. In the past there have been times when we went on training tours around the country. The longest took three months. Such a thing could happen again. That kind of thing could easily eliminate the possibility of our monitoring input from our Open Forum for a time—rest assured we always return. During such times we expect our readers to have faith based upon our twelve year track record. We expect them to kindly do their best to support each other and stay the course. The bottom line is, what we have already shown is accurate and factual. It does not need us to support it. It just needs the people all over to discover it. That is where you come in. You have to study the law and history for yourself and learn the truth for yourself not just base what you hear on what you learned from us. For example, we agree with your statement:

That is exactly why we confirm elections and put the information we have on our website. It is exactly why we don’t do anything in the elections other than help people privately learn their own State’s laws regarding seating their original jurisdiction governors and then support their own private efforts to secure those seats. Let’s look at each of the questions you asked:

planetmark wrote:How many are actively seated as governor?

At the current time, to the best of our knowledge, there are 37 original jurisdiction governors seated throughout the country today.

planetmark wrote:How many votes did they get elected with?

Before we respond to this question let us ask the more relevant question, ‘How many votes does it take to seat a governor?’ The answer to that question is one more vote than any other candidate got—a simple majority—one vote can do it. If only one person takes part in a constitutionally set election and that person votes, there vote constitutes a win by 100% of the votes cast and the candidate they vote for wins. If there are 5,000,001 votes cast and one candidate gets 2,500,000 votes and the other candidate gets 2,500,001, the latter wins by one vote. The answer to you question is then that each election we have confirmed showed each candidate that ran received at least a simple majority of the votes and none of the elections have been challenged to date other than Mr. Madsen’s election, which was challenged in court and the evidence presented there concluded that the corporate State of Colorado had confirmed Mr. Madsen was in fact the Governor of Colorado, the original jurisdiction Republic State. The actual numbers related to each of the elections is irrelevant unless contested within the jurisdiction of the elections.

planetmark wrote:What is their qualifications for the position?

The qualification for serving in each state governor’s office is defined in the respective state’s constitution and laws. There is no point in our attempting to relate those here when anyone can look up those qualifications at their leisure. It is a necessary element for any candidate to fill the office in their State.

planetmark wrote:Why are they even running for the spot in the first place?

This question is answered in our materials elsewhere repeatedly so we will not give it a full review here; but, suffice it to say, the original jurisdiction seats were vacated when the states formed private corporations called “State of ‘X’” (where ‘X’ is the common state name), hereinafter “Corp. State”, and then administratively vacated the seats of the original jurisdiction government in favor of the Corp. State business management for the state. The key here is they vacated the original jurisdiction seats and those seats need to be filled so that those governors can reseat their State’s two national Senators, thus reseating Congress so that it can confirm an original jurisdiction President back into the seat of our President of the U.S.A.; without which we cannot win our country back. Yes it is a large task and it will take years to accomplish, but there is no time like the present to start and continue to follow through until the task is done.

planetmark wrote:What are their views on ANY subject?

To Team Law this question is totally irrelevant. We have nothing to do with their views and if the people of any individual State want to seat a governor who is a bumbling idiot and that person is willing to serve, that has absolutely nothing to do with us. In the case of Governor Brailey (Jim): we personally met the man and found him to be an interesting man full of good beliefs and willing to serve. As the matter was reported to us by him, Jim was involved in a situation where he was accused of possessing a gun in a way the State of Washington statutorily held as a felony; and then Jim failed to present a reasonable case against the accusations against him. Some may call that an imbecilic act (all things considered) others may call him insane, others still find him to be an outstanding patriot; yet no one’s opinion of him now, or of his views, go beyond the view of those that cast sufficient votes to set him in office—which we confirmed he did receive. Such is the elector’s right, to elect whomever they desire by way of qualified ballot. Thus the issue asked here of Team Law as it may relate to what any of those governors’ opinions, views or philosophies may be is irrelevant. We would certainly hope that they are all good people working to save our country and we believe that is the case.

Your remaining questions regarding the elections of public officials are good ones and as you participate in elections you are wise to consider them; however, Team Law certainly has nothing to do with those matters. They are personal matters that every elector should consider to carry out their respective responsibilities in seating their governors. All Team Law does in these elections is hopefully inspire people to take part in the election of their governors and thereafter we report what information we are given in the form of who won, if that information is made available to us. There is nothing more for us to do. As an Original Jurisdiction Senator, Mr. Madsen can not interfere with that process other than voice his support of those that are willing to do their part.

We think the idea of:

planetmark wrote:A website covering the elections, or status, or goings-on with the office in each state would be wonderful.

Still, the concept that Team Law has to do that with the resources we have available is asking a bit much for this years election. Perhaps as participation in the elections grow and develop more campaigning resources, that will be possible. Meanwhile, it would be good to see that happen. We don’t agree that such a site would add legitimacy. Legitimacy will remain the providence of the people involved in the process following the law; which, according to the information we have received so far, the original jurisdiction governors have done. Again, we are not accountable for them they are accountable for their own qualifications and actions.

The following allegation is irrational:

planetmark wrote:With the information available at this point, on this site or any other, a rational person could only conclude that there are ZERO "original jurisdiction governors" seated at this time.

Quite the contrary; from review of our website a reasonably rational person interested in the matter would first have to research the matter of original jurisdiction governors to verify whether what we presented is historically and lawfully accurate. After they had done that they would have to take a look at the information there for their own State and verify the existence of the person that was alleged to have been elected. If they could then confirm from that governor that the governor had received any votes and if there was no evidence that any other person had received such votes then they could reasonably conclude that the governor was legitimately elected. If you think a great website adds legitimacy to an election then you must be fooled by the great smokescreen put on by the Corp. States giving any appearance that they are in fact the actual original jurisdiction Republic States as formed by the various Enabling Acts of the United States of America. even though every element of requirement of a Republic is missing from their natures and from their construction.

We also challenge any allegation that:

planetmark wrote:1) The "believers" who just really want to believe are convinced that unknown = lots. 2) Everyone else is left with apathy and uncertainty, or outright rejection of the notion.

Such an allegation presupposes such believers unrealistically think that that “lots” of people are aware of what is going on; which is an unrealistic belief. Again the only relevant question as to electors involved in an election is how many votes does it take to win? The answer to that question is now and has always been, “One.” If you get one vote more that any other candidate, you win. That is the only reasonable assumption one can gather from any election. That is the ultimate certainty of all elections held in accord with the democratic process. Any other imagination is merely a mind game.

To allege that:

planetmark wrote:the "believers" are then left with the opportunity to be self-deceived, and follow lock-step into whatever con is put before them.

presupposes that “believers” have only such a ridiculous option. That is exactly our point. People have options and they are self-accountable to take them. It is impossible to obey, or honor, or sustain the law if you do not know what it is. That is exactly why we help people learn our history and the law. It is exactly why from our first Team Law meeting we have prodded people to understand they must not simply believe what we (or anyone else) tell them without first doing their own research that proves the facts by at least two or three factual witnesses. The simple fact is—we are in this situation in our country because people failed to do their own work; they trusted in the hearsay of others. You can ask anyone, “can you believe what you get from the media?” The overwhelming response is, “Absolutely not!” However, they also have an opinion about “911” and O.J. Simpson’s innocence or guilt. Why? Because — they formed unreasonable beliefs from what they heard in the media. We agree with the potential alleged in your statement:

planetmark wrote: If you believe something with no facts, you are a victim waiting to be fleeced.

But your allegation the we are doing something related to these elections in secrecy is ridiculous. Votes in most elections are privately made by secret ballot. That is exactly why the voting booths support secret ballots. However, every election we have supported of the original jurisdiction governors since Mr. Madsen was elected as Colorado’s original jurisdiction governor was performed by a publicly posted voting process confirmable at the Clerk and Recorders offices around the country. Again, those elections are none of our business; they are the subject matter of the people of those individual states, but the votes were voluntarily made public by those electors so that they could be confirmed in this day of age where the Corp. State and or the people have hoodwinked the populace into the impression that such Corp. States are actually Republic States in the Union of States of the United States of America, which is false. As to your proposal of an implied legitimacy being formed by making such specific vote counts public, we disagree entirely. Such matters are reserved to the voters that actually participate in the elections (and in this case all of those votes were made public in their localities where they were made). Regarding such an allegation of published counts making an election legitimate, we point you to a book, Vote Scam, which discloses the first so called election of Bill Clinton into a presidential office, where he actually only received some 9% of the votes yet the published (but computer rigged) count showed he won. That does not make that so called election legitimate. Try to find anyone that voted for him in the first election—such voters are rare indeed. All of the publication and subsequent support in the world cannot possibly make that legitimate. That is simply wrong and nothing can make it right, especially not what the people suffered through since then at the cause of that illegitimate election in the Corp. U.S. Any reasonable person can see that.

Finally, we challenge your closing comment:

planetmark wrote:"we the people" would like to know that for sure.

You personally are not, "we the people". You are only one of the people, which neither constitutes “we” nor authorizes you to speak for the people. Still, you, “one man”, can make a difference by standing up and doing something to help us win our country back—at least by qualifying and casting your vote for Governor—one vote wins every election. Will it be yours?

If you would truly like to know anything “for sure” you will have to do your own research, you will not be able to rely on anyone else’s work or research, which has been our point from the beginning.

If you want to know how many votes any Governor got ask them—that is exactly why they authorize us to publish their contact information. They are certainly the only ones that might know; and, whether they received one or 2,000,001 votes, if they got one more vote than any other candidate, then according to law they still won the election. All democratic process elections are won by one vote—the one that gave the elected one vote more than any other legitimate candidate—the margin beyond that single significant vote is of no consequence; just as are all of the potential votes that were not cast in such an election.

planetmark wrote:Is there a single state with a website detailing their efforts and accomplishments?

The only website we are aware of that addresses the original jurisdiction elections is Team Law’s. We expect the States have not individually put up original jurisdiction election sites because Senator Madsen has openly asked all of the Governors to avoid taking any overt actions of any kind until we have all of the States’ governors in their seats. There is a significant necessity of following this admonition: we must first awaken the people to what is going on; then, we will reseat the formal Electoral College so that it can hold a legitimate election of our President; then, the Senate will be able to confirm that election and its lawful legitimacy will easily be established. This process cannot properly be accomplished in some sort of coup. It must be done in accord with our original jurisdiction Constitution for the United States of America.

Your inquiry seemed a bit negative in its review of what Mr. Madsen or Team Law has done in relation to our original jurisdiction government or our reporting of it. We hope you don’t take our response as negative even though it challenges your assertions. There is nothing we can do about the governors in office. We are grateful to them for doing their own research, getting elected and then standing up to be counted as governors. This year we need to seat almost an entire new body of governors. We need 25 governors. Thus we need your support. We hope that as the original jurisdiction governors over the past twelve years have worked with us to take their seats the new governors will also do the same and continue there ready to stand up when the time comes to reseat our national government. If the people are not pleased with what we have done, we ask you to remember, at least we stood up and did what we did. Had we not done what we did, there would be no one sitting in our original jurisdiction government seats today and there would be little hope of that happening soon. To those willing to run for office, we do not care how many people take part in your elections, so long as you cast your own votes. Team Law deals with individual people. We only hope that each of those that learn of our work will do their own homework and discover the necessity of participating in the original jurisdiction gubernatorial elections, follow the law and vote for somebody that qualifies as an Elector. Even if they vote for themselves and they are the only voter that casts a vote in their State, they will win by default and in the eyes of the law they will have been elected.

If we had 48 such governors around the country we would be ready to fully seat our original jurisdiction Senate, which would be ready for the Electoral College election. If by then, the people of the country are aware of those events and of the other work Team Law has accomplished, rest assured we will have won our country back and our nation will embark on a future that will be its most bounteous and blessed yet.

We appreciate your intent in asking for more and hope you will forgive us for not having the resources to make this happen overnight—millions have gone into it to date and millions more will be spent before we are done. The fact remains that whatever the cost, whatever we have done, it is the only effort in our country today that is going after following the law to reseat our original jurisdiction government, which is the best form of government available in the world thus far. We hope you remain with us in these efforts to save our Constitution, and our country, from hanging by a thread.

Citizen Publius,
Some of the Governors reasonably do not want to publish their personal information on the web in such a manner because they see such a publication as an invitation to malicious attacks on their private home lives (from deranged web surfers or other sorts of stalkers), which they certainly have a right. Corp. State Governors have their offices at the capital taking their mail along with the privileged use, and security, of the State Police to keep their private home lives and families reasonably private and protected from such perverts. Original jurisdiction governors do not all have such protections at this time so we welcome their request with a contact intermediary service, should they choose to use it—where such an intermediary service has no need to be located in their home state, using our office for such communication is their welcome perogative.